Two Philly Officers charged

[dnewton3]

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/02/07/nr-dnt-valencia-philadelphia-police-beating-charge.cnn


As much as I am openly biased in a pro-police stance, I cannot, do not and will not make excuses for behavior such as this.

For those of you who were vocal against the cops in Ferguson (Brown shooting) and NYC (Garner event), take heed; this is evidece that the systems work as intended! The Grand Jury has brought charges against these two Philly Officers. As much as I adamantly defended Wilson and those in NYC, I cannot find anything but contempt for those who tarnish the badge in this manner. I will not take a stance in their favor. They likely voilated their dept policy and they certainly usurped the UoF doctrine. They violated public trust. And as a Deputy, this sickens me to my core. These guys are supposed to be the "good guys". I can assure you that they are not welcome on my team.


My point?
WE HAVE THE BEST LEGAL SYSTEM.
IT IS NOT PERFECT; IT HAS ERRORS AT TIMES.
BUT THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE TIME, IT GETS IT RIGHT.

The Grand Jury has indicted these officers; rightly so IMO.
And I suspect there will be a Federal Civil Rights investigation as well.

 

[rjundi]

ALL departments have some real jerks of varying degree. Thankfuklly prevelance of video seems to keep things in better check.

I am not spouting as I know four officers across different departments and they say the same thing. Tough job and sad those few jerks make them look bad.

 

[MalfunctionProne]

This is why we love you, dnewton3. That you will not tolerate things such as this.

It is an honor to discuss things, even in a pro-police light with you.

 

[doitmyself]

dnewton3,

I think that your view of the judicial system is just a tiny bit sugar coated and biased due to you being on the "good" side.

Based on my experience, the public needs to be aware of their rights and proceed with caution. Let me explain from the other side, and I hope you understand.

Let's assume that a person actually is 100% innocent.

Regarding law enforcement, they will try to assure you that the best thing to do is cooperate 100% by telling/doing everything up front. They will assure you that they are your friends, there to help you, and that 100% cooperation is best. They will coerce you mentally to tell/show all in the guise of "honesty is the best policy", you have nothing to hide, etc..

If you choose not to talk, they play mind games and tell you that the only reason you're doing this is because you are hiding something. They are trained to break you down, mentally.

They do this without Miranda Rights because you are not yet under arrest.

In reality, the things you confide in truth and trust can easily be turned against you in court. Example: you welcome them into your home and dirty dishes in the sink becomes (in court) filthy, unkept home.

Have a good laugh, but I KNOW this happens. Which brings up the judicial system. Yes, I agree it is good. But, the lawyers turn the courtroom into a three ring circus. The truth often becomes of little consequence. It's often all about the game. I often repeat that it's better to be guilty and rich rather than innocent and poor.

Makes me laugh when I read/watch the news and every time an accused decides not to tell all, the immediate implication is that they are guilty and hiding things.

My advice is to be aware that everything you cooperate about can be turned against you in the court room circus.

 

[MalfunctionProne]

Originally Posted By: doitmyself
dnewton3,

I think that your view of the judicial system is just a tiny bit sugar coated and biased due to you being on the "good" side.

Based on my experience, the public needs to be aware of their rights and proceed with caution. Let me explain from the other side, and I hope you understand.

Let's assume that a person actually is 100% innocent.

Regarding law enforcement, they will try to assure you that the best thing to do is cooperate 100% by telling/doing everything up front. They will assure you that they are your friends, there to help you, and that 100% cooperation is best. They will coerce you mentally to tell/show all in the guise of "honesty is the best policy", you have nothing to hide, etc..

If you choose not to talk, they play mind games and tell you that the only reason you're doing this is because you are hiding something. They are trained to break you down, mentally.

They do this without Miranda Rights because you are not yet under arrest.

In reality, the things you confide in truth and trust can easily be turned against you in court. Example: you welcome them into your home and dirty dishes in the sink becomes (in court) filthy, unkept home.

Have a good laugh, but I KNOW this happens. Which brings up the judicial system. Yes, I agree it is good. But, the lawyers turn the courtroom into a three ring circus. The truth often becomes of little consequence. It's often all about the game. I often repeat that it's better to be guilty and rich rather than innocent and poor.

Makes me laugh when I read/watch the news and every time an accused decides not to tell all, the immediate implication is that they are guilty and hiding things.

My advice is to be aware that everything you cooperate about can be turned against you in the court room circus.


The mere accusation of a crime just about insures guilt.

I too have been on The Dark Side. Some sorry, unworthy cops. Truly.

Now I live in the land of them: Newark.

 

[crazyoildude]

There are cameras everywhere and many departments remind their officers every day at roll call, back in the old days the good ol tune up was the best deterrent against crime today you have to play by the book because there are a lot of spies out there in the woods

 

[crazyoildude]

I have lots of family and friends in law enforcement and there are still some honest ones on the job.

 

[29662]

Sorry DN but the system only works sometimes. I understand your bias, but that's not the way things work in real life for most people. I know of many instances in which the police acted in a manner which would have the rest of us in 'cuffs and in jail. Unfortunately the police have too much power and abuse it willingly. And the biggest problem as I see it is that the "good cops" will happily lie for the "bad" cops. I have witnessed it on numerous occasions.

 

[gman2304]

At the very beginning of the video was this guy running? It starts with the officers car coming into view and the officers stopping the car and getting out and then the officers confront the guy. He was accused of running a stop sign on his scooter and when the cops pulled him over he ran. What would be the SOP for PD's in this country under these conditions?

 

[dnewton3]

I would disagree that I sugar coat things. I am admittedly biased. Those are different concepts.

I do make a very concerted effort to fully consider and present all evidence when posting here with you all, be it about oils, filters, guns or legal issues, tires, toothpaste, etc.

Recently, in two separate threads that I started, I discussed how and why the Ferguson and NYC Grand Juries were likely right in their decisions. Most folks don't well analyze what they see, especially when not informed of the mantra behind many LEO actions. I fervently defended those officers.

Here, just the opposite exists. After my investigation and now seeing this video evidence, I cannot conclude anything but they beat this guy down illegally. The system has spoken; they will be charged.


The "system" is not perfect, but it functions quite well most of the time. We, as citizens, should always be critical of the process. But we, as citizens, also get to participate in the process. I cannot tell you how many times in my life I've heard folks whine and complain about being on jury duty, as if they have contempt for such service. I think they should be not only proud, but excited to serve! And yet it is very common for folks to shirk their responsibilities, even lie, to get out of civil duty. It is that; it is a DUTY to yourself and your countrymen. When someone serves with earnest intent on a Jury or Grand Jury, they are being patriotic IMO.

My point is thus:
The system is not flawed in design; it is flawed due to interaction with people who induce error into it. The best we can hope for is to trust those who swear an oath, and prosecute those break the law. If a cop swears that oath but breaks the law, he has gone from crime-fighter to criminal, and should be dealt with accordingly with no more or less passion than any other person who has Rights.


How is it you state I sugar coat things?

 

[SwedishRider]

Originally Posted By: doitmyself
My advice is to be aware that everything you cooperate about can be turned against you in the court room circus.


In reality, you should never speak to the police. Here's why:

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted By: doitmyself
dnewton3,

I think that your view of the judicial system is just a tiny bit sugar coated and biased due to you being on the "good" side.

Based on my experience, the public needs to be aware of their rights and proceed with caution. Let me explain from the other side, and I hope you understand.

Let's assume that a person actually is 100% innocent.

Regarding law enforcement, they will try to assure you that the best thing to do is cooperate 100% by telling/doing everything up front. They will assure you that they are your friends, there to help you, and that 100% cooperation is best. They will coerce you mentally to tell/show all in the guise of "honesty is the best policy", you have nothing to hide, etc..

If you choose not to talk, they play mind games and tell you that the only reason you're doing this is because you are hiding something. They are trained to break you down, mentally.

They do this without Miranda Rights because you are not yet under arrest.

In reality, the things you confide in truth and trust can easily be turned against you in court. Example: you welcome them into your home and dirty dishes in the sink becomes (in court) filthy, unkept home.

Makes me laugh when I read/watch the news and every time an accused decides not to tell all, the immediate implication is that they are guilty and hiding things.

My advice is to be aware that everything you cooperate about can be turned against you in the court room circus.


I don't think it is a laughing matter and you seem to be biased on the other side.

And yes, you do have rights.

[Note: I am a non-attorney person but have worked in law enforcement in the past].

If you are simply a witness to a crime, it is best to give as much information as possible based on your best recollection.

Since you have rights, if you are brought in for questioning, you have the right to answer or not to answer any questions.

One question to ask is: Am I considered a witness or a suspect?

If you are being arrested, then ask for an attorney to be present during any questioning, unless you give up that right and freely answer without an attorney.

The police are there to enforce laws and protect the general public, and that includes you.

Again, I think our system works and I for one don't want to see any major changes that would benefit the 'alleged' criminal element.

The first post indeed shows that the "system" does work for both sides.

 

[doitmyself]

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
How is it you state I sugar coat things?


In your last several threads you keep saying to be trustful of and rely on the system and say or imply that "innocent until proven guilty" is reality. It isn't. So much truth twisting gyrations take place throughout the justice process. People are in denial of this unless they have been through it. It's like trying to tell someone what chemotherapy is like.

I'm not disagreeing with your arguments about the Ferguson case and the grand jury findings.

I advocate cooperation with law enforcement, but be wary.

 

[MalfunctionProne]

Originally Posted By: SwedishRider
Originally Posted By: doitmyself
My advice is to be aware that everything you cooperate about can be turned against you in the court room circus.


In reality, you should never speak to the police. Here's why:



Or



They should show this during the course of getting a Driver's License.

 

[MalfunctionProne]

Originally Posted By: crazyoildude
There are cameras everywhere and many departments remind their officers every day at roll call, back in the old days the good ol tune up was the best deterrent against crime today you have to play by the book because there are a lot of spies out there in the woods


Those cameras do not do anything.

Murders happen, and my car got stolen. On camera.

Cancel the "cameras" argument.

 

[SwedishRider]

Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Originally Posted By: doitmyself
If you choose not to talk, they play mind games and tell you that the only reason you're doing this is because you are hiding something. They are trained to break you down, mentally.

They do this without Miranda Rights because you are not yet under arrest.

In reality, the things you confide in truth and trust can easily be turned against you in court. Example: you welcome them into your home and dirty dishes in the sink becomes (in court) filthy, unkept home.


[Note: I am a non-attorney person but have worked in law enforcement in the past].

If you are simply a witness to a crime, it is best to give as much information as possible based on your best recollection.

Since you have rights, if you are brought in for questioning, you have the right to answer or not to answer any questions.

One question to ask is: Am I considered a witness or a suspect?

If you are being arrested, then ask for an attorney to be present during any questioning, unless you give up that right and freely answer without an attorney.


MolaKule, did you watch that video I linked? The officer openly states the methods they use to get people to unknowingly confess. And the attorney gives solid, evidence-based reasoning as to why you should NEVER speak to the police... and the officer said that everything the attorney (professor) said is true and correct.

Watch the video, it's only about 45 minutes. And don't talk to the police...

 

[JHZR2]

So Ive taken the stance in other discussions that an officer's safety does not trump mine, and thus my innocence until proven guilt should prevent the force and behaviors that one sometimes sees from Police.

That said, the murder rate in Philadelphia has been quite high, and, like the shooting in Bridgeton where the officer took out the guy who got out of the car, at what point do tensions run so high that natural responses naturally overcome to cause such behavior?

IMO there is a high level of disrespect by the "thugs" out there, but there is also a high level by the police. That makes it very difficult in the eyes of many, to justify any behavior.

There is always a distribution of people and their qualities, morals, mental stability, etc. Some of them end up in any profession. If the system purges these bad actors, then it is a good self-cleaning process. I am not in a position to play jury, so the best I can do is assume that the jury worked as intended.

 

[Bladecutter]

This is the type of court case I wouldn't mind being a member of the jury.

The one piece of video evidence shown in the news story looks pretty cut and dry.
A police vehicle crashes into a person riding a scooter, causing him to violently crash.

The officers then jump out of their vehicle, pick up the (possibly injured) rider, and slam him into a brick wall. They then hit him several times, and then slam him into the ground, where you see the scooter rider immediately curl up into the fetal position, and those two officers start beating on him while he is on the ground.

What I don't see is their initial confrontation with the scooter rider.
They say that the rider slammed one of the officers into a brick wall, and repeatedly elbowed the officer in the head.

If the officers have that on the dash cam of the police car, that changes the entire event, doesn't it?

If, however, all the motorist did was blow through a red light, and this is the officer's first contact with the motorist, someone will need to explain why these two officers have a policy of assaulting motorcyclists with potential deadly force (PIT manuever as seen in the video) as a first contact.

I'm assuming there's more video to be seen, and the officers know they have it on their patrol vehicle's dash cam. I'm curious how this one will play out. If they don't have that type of evidence, I will guess that these two officers will be given plea deals, and stripped of their uniforms.

BC.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted By: SwedishRider
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Originally Posted By: doitmyself
If you choose not to talk, they play mind games and tell you that the only reason you're doing this is because you are hiding something. They are trained to break you down, mentally.

They do this without Miranda Rights because you are not yet under arrest.

In reality, the things you confide in truth and trust can easily be turned against you in court. Example: you welcome them into your home and dirty dishes in the sink becomes (in court) filthy, unkept home.


[Note: I am a non-attorney person but have worked in law enforcement in the past].

If you are simply a witness to a crime, it is best to give as much information as possible based on your best recollection.

Since you have rights, if you are brought in for questioning, you have the right to answer or not to answer any questions.

One question to ask is: Am I considered a witness or a suspect?

If you are being arrested, then ask for an attorney to be present during any questioning, unless you give up that right and freely answer without an attorney.


MolaKule, did you watch that video I linked? The officer openly states the methods they use to get people to unknowingly confess. And the attorney gives solid, evidence-based reasoning as to why you should NEVER speak to the police... and the officer said that everything the attorney (professor) said is true and correct.

Watch the video, it's only about 45 minutes. And don't talk to the police...

Before you convict me, I was posting at the same time the videos were being posted, and the videos run about 55 minutes total, not 45 minutes.

I don't disagree with either video, and as doitmyself said, "Cooperate but be wary."

I would add,
Quote:
be respectful and know your rights
.

Quote:
IMO there is a high level of disrespect by the "thugs" out there, but there is also a high level by the police. That makes it very difficult in the eyes of many, to justify any behavior.


And that is the crux of many problems.

Disrespect for the Rule of Law and those enforcing the law essentially says, "I am a class of people that does not have to obey the law for whatever rationalization I can come up with."

 

[Mykl]

Originally Posted By: SwedishRider
MolaKule, did you watch that video I linked? The officer openly states the methods they use to get people to unknowingly confess. And the attorney gives solid, evidence-based reasoning as to why you should NEVER speak to the police... and the officer said that everything the attorney (professor) said is true and correct.

Watch the video, it's only about 45 minutes. And don't talk to the police...

They make a very good argument in that video. But at the same time, accurate witness testimony does need to be provided to the police when possible so they can go after the *right* people.

Obviously you want to protect yourself from being falsely accused, but the system can't work if everybody refuses to talk to the police under any circumstances.